Physchim62 (
talk·contribs) (self-nomination)—I am celebrating six months on wikipedia and my 6000th edit by requesting adminship. Most of my work is centered around WikiProject Chemicals and Pages needing translation into English: this rarely needs admin powers, but I would still like to move on to the point of responding to requests for assistance rather than originating them.
Physchim62 15:53, 30 October 2005 (UTC)reply
Support
Support - looks like a solid contributor to me. --
Celestianpowerháblame 16:01, 30 October 2005 (UTC)reply
Strong support PC has become a mainstay of the chemistry pages. He contributes excellent content, has a very strong chemistry knowledge, but also manages to understand technical aspects of the wiki software. He has already done a lot of fantastic cleanup work in stubs and categories. Disagreements with others have generally been minor and handled very diplomatically, yet his view has often prevailed. I only hope that he doesn't leave chemistry to spend his life tracking sockpuppets...!
Walkerma 16:25, 30 October 2005 (UTC)reply
Support because the temperature has just gone above -20C.
CambridgeBayWeather 16:31, 30 October 2005 (UTC)reply
Support at standard temperature and pressure. --
Rune Welsh |
ταλκ |
Esperanza 17:16, 30 October 2005 (UTC)reply
Support - Everything looks good.
Sango123(talk) 18:12, 30 October 2005 (UTC)reply
Support. A mainstay of Translation to English, multilingual and not dead-serious all the time. Definite pick. -
Kookykman (
talk •
contribs)
Support, I have confidence that this user will not abuse administrator tools.
Christopher Parham(talk) 19:46, 30 October 2005 (UTC)reply
Strong Support. A good knowledgeable contribuant to Wikipedia.
Wim van Dorst 20:00, 30 October 2005 (UTC).reply
Support - I was thinking of nominating this user just today coincidentally :-) - Physchim62 makes Wikipedia a comfortable place to contribute material. A valuable member of the community who could really make good use of the administrative toolset. --
HappyCamper 21:38, 30 October 2005 (UTC)reply
Support Sound candidate.
Alfmelmac 18:03, 31 October 2005 (UTC)reply
Support, the editor has done an excellent work over at PNT — where I have personally interacted with him on occasion — and I trust that he will make good use of sysop rights. I would have nominated him myself. --
Sn0wflake 18:08, 31 October 2005 (UTC)reply
S'port and what I want to know is, why the hell did he have to resort to a self-nomination!
Doc(?) 18:25, 31 October 2005 (UTC)reply
If it's at
STP, then the pressure is obviously 100 kPa: however, the
gas constant in this parallel universe would be 3.525 J·K−1·mol−1 (as opposed to 8.314 J·K−1·mol−1 in the more conventional universe which we know and love). At 25 °C, 3.02 mol CO2 in a volume of 2.34 L exerts a pressure of approx. 27.8 bar (from the
Van der Waals equation).
Physchim62(talk·RfA) 08:37, 5 November 2005 (UTC)reply
Yay! I was trying to see if you would fall for it and use the
Ideal gas law. :)
Titoxd(
?!?) 20:14, 5 November 2005 (UTC)reply
A. I'm not sure that
anticipate is the correct verb for this question. I anticipate going on RC-patrol by editing a few chemistry articles...
I expect to help out on closing AfDs, as I think it is important for the debates to be resolved as soon as possible after the five-day period. This is a service which admins provide to other users who have taken the time and effort to bring these articles up for debate and to give their views on them.
WP:CP and
WP:RM are two other pages with backlogs where sysop powers are necessary to provide the service to other users, and I would envisage helping out here as well.
I go on RC-patrol occasionally, but I do not find it particularly rewarding—I prefer working a little further down the chain at
WP:PNT or
Category:Chemistry stubs where I have the time to consider my edits rather than acting in the emrgency. That being said, chemistry articles are not immune from vandalism, and I keep my eyes open for attacks that come that way.
2. Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
A.
Ammonia is an article which has taken a lot of my WikiEnergy, to bring it up from a level where it was mostly taken from the 1911 Britannica to a point where it is reasonably comprehensive (although there are still some supporting articles to write). Otherwise, I am working on the translation of
de:Alkane to
Alkane, which will hopefully provide a model for other
functional group articles. I am also helping out on the two chemistry-related peer reviews at the moment,
acetic acid and
Raney nickel.
3. Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
A. The ambiance is pretty good both at
WP:Chem and at
WP:PNT, so I am lucky to have escaped serious edit conflicts. The worst to date concerned the presentation of data on
paracetamol, where a fellow editor wished to standardise it with other chemicals pages, whereas I felt it was better left standardised with other drugs articles. The question of how to present information is difficult because it is so often subjective; the only solution appears to be plenty of kB on talk pages (article and user) to try to reach consensus, and a good dose of tolerance and respect for other editors.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.